AI Regulation Showdown: Ex‑Palantir Engineer Forms ‘Who Decides’ to Mobilize Voters

AI Regulation Takes Center Stage in New Advocacy Push

Former Palantir engineer and New York Assemblymember Alex Bores has turned a congressional defeat into a national campaign to give voters a voice on AI regulation. After co‑authoring the RAISE Act—New York’s pioneering AI safety law—and losing a high‑spending House primary, Bores and his former chief of staff Anna Myers announced the nonprofit Who Decides on Tuesday.

Why AI Regulation Matters Now

The group entered the arena with a ↑ $10 million seed fund and a goal of ↑ $20 million by 2027, aiming for a ↑ $30 million war chest ahead of the 2028 election cycle. “Give the American people a say in how AI develops,” Bores told Reuters, noting that most voters already have “answer keys” for issues like Medicare or the Green New Deal, but AI remains a “gray zone” where even the questions themselves are up for grabs.

“We’re in a limited window where the framing of AI policy is still being written,” Bores said.

The RAISE Act survived a bruising battle in Albany, emerging after a coalition of 55 groups pushed for third‑party audits and whistleblower protections—provisions later stripped under pressure from a Silicon Valley faction that favors minimal oversight. That faction, bolstered by a ↓ $7.6 million super‑PAC spend from Bloomberg-linked donors, helped defeat Bores in the primary, which saw over ↓ $40 million in outside money, the most expensive House primary of the cycle.

Who Decides plans to leverage existing Democratic advocacy networks in eleven swing states, avoiding a direct cash war with entrenched AI‑industry PACs. The strategy hinges on “uniting the AI advocacy organizations Democrats already trust,” Bores explained, while keeping the door open to any political actor willing to champion robust AI regulation.

Polling data from the Annenberg Public Policy Center (Feb‑Mar 2026) shows 65 % of Americans believe the government has done “too little” on AI, with majorities across party lines supporting tighter rules. Yet legislative inertia persists, echoing the pattern seen in gun‑policy debates where public sentiment outpaces congressional action.

Sen. Ted Cruz’s recent partnership with Sen. Amy Klobuchar and Majority Leader John Thune on a federal safety bill illustrates the tug‑of‑war between state‑level initiatives and a potential federal pre‑emptive framework. Bores warns that such moves could “shut down the real power people have to regulate” if they consolidate authority at the national level.

While Democrats boast enthusiasm, Bores cautions against a “circular firing squad” where sub‑issues eclipse the broader goal of comprehensive oversight. “The same players are opposing almost every AI proposal; we should be sitting at the same table,” he asserts.

Reported by: Eleanor Cross

Chief Washington Correspondent